GEOPHYSICS (08/430/0012) CRUST AND UPPER MANTLE SEISMIC SURVEYS (2) OUTLINE Large–scale Refraction Surveys Interpretation of refraction profiles multilayered models, detection of a low–velocity layer ¯ dipping refracting boundaries, reversed profiles ¯ estimation of velocities, use of reduced travel–times ¯ Crustal refraction surveys the Mohoroviˇci´cdiscontinuity (the “MohoÔ) ¯ continental crust: velocities, thickness, the Conrad discontinuity ¯ oceanic crust: velocities, layering, thicknesses ¯ Seismic velocities in the upper mantle interpretation of travel–times through the upper mantle ¯ evidence for the low–velocity layer, regional variations ¯ Background reading: Fowler §4.4, Lowrie §3.6 & 3.7 References Blundell, D., Freeman, R. & Mueller, S., 1992. A Continent Revealed: The European Geotraverse. Cambridge University Press. Summary of seismic refraction and reflection results across Europe. Open University Course Team, 1990. Lithosphere Geophysics in Britain. Study Unit S339 1B, Open University Educational Enterprises. Good review of seismic refraction and reflection results in Great Britain. GEOPHYSICS (08/430/0012) SEISMIC REFRACTION SURVEYS Large scale seismic refraction are a primary source of information on the structure of the crust and upper mantle. At a much smaller scale they are used for engineering purposes (e.g. depth to bedrock) and in hydrology (e.g. depth to the water table). A seismic source is fired into a spread of seismometers out to a distance of typically 10 times the depth of investigation or more. So, assuming a depth of 30 km to the Moho, a crustal refraction experiment would ideally record data to 300 km or more. Recording seismic waves to this distance requires a suáciently large source (e.g. depth charges). When this strong a source is not available, the experiment can make use of the post-critical reflections from the Moho as well as any refractions from beneath it that are recorded. The wide angles of these post-critical reflections are outside the range of conventional reflection surveying techniques. The P-wave travel times are plotted against distance and interpreted in terms of depths to refracting interfaces and velocities of the refracting layers. In more advanced interpretation, synthetic seismograms are computed from a model of interface depth profiles and layer velocities and the model is altered until the synthetic seismograms match the refraction seismograms. GEOPHYSICS (08/430/0012) THE LAYER OVER A HALF SPACE The model of uniform layer over a half space, described in "Seismic Travel Time Curves" of Lecture 4, encapsulates the basic principle of refraction seismology. It is the prototypal model for the interpretation of refraction profiles. The model and its P-wave travel-time curves, which should be memorised, are repeated below using idealised crustal refraction parameters. source receivers ooooooooooo *CAS £ ¡ ³ - 6 CAS £ ¡ ³ direct wave V1 = 6:0km/s CW AUSw£ ¡ ³ ²c sin ²c = V1=V2 H = 30km C A£·S ¡ ³7 ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ C £A S¡ ³ ¡ ¡ ¡ head wave C£ A¡ S³ ¡ ¡ -¡ ? V2 = 8:0km/s P−wave travel times for a layer over a half space 90 direct P 80 reflected P refracted P 70 60 50 slope=1/8.0 40 critical distance travel−time (s) 30 t 0 20 10 t i slope=1/6.0 crossover distance 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 distance (km) GEOPHYSICS (08/430/0012) INTERPRETATION OF REFRACTION PROFILES (1) Multilayered structures, velocity gradients, low velocity layers, irregular and dipping layers introduce complicated formulae into interpretation, the details of which are of specialist interest only. The following outlines the general form of the travel time curves from these complexities. Multilayered structures introduce additional segments into the travel time curves. Where one layer over a half space gives two P–wave first arrival straight line travel time segments (one for the direct, and one for the refracted arrivals), two layers over a half space produce three segments, three layers over a half space produce four segments, and so on. This assumes that the velocity of the layers increases with depth so that each extra layer introduces an extra refracted arrival. No refraction can be recorded from a layer whose velocity is less than any velocity above it. Consequently low velocity layers cannot be observed directly from refraction surveys and must be inferred by modelling. Where they introduce a clear break in the first arrival travel times, they can be detected and modelled fairly readily but their existence is often not obvious and, if masked, can confuse the interpretation. The problem of a hidden layer is not confined to low velocity layers since not every layer in a multilayered structure necessarily produces first arrivals or even identifiable later arrivals. Velocity gradients can be approximated by a finely layered structure or they can be modelled by ray tracing. The rays are curved and the travel time curves are also curves. Strong velocity gradients can introduce triplications into the travel time curves. Irregular layers, such as the undulating weathered layer at the Earth's surface, introduce varying time delays into refraction travel times. Exploration geophysics texts (e.g. Parasnis 1997) describe a number of techiques for interpreting these types of data. Travel times from a series of layers of varying thickness are modelled by ray-tracing software. Reference Parasnis, D.S., 1997. Principles of Applied Geophysics. Chapman & Hall. GEOPHYSICS (08/430/0012) REFRACTION TRAVEL TIMES FROM MULTILAYED STRUCTURES The figures below show schematic travel times for a two layers over a half-space. In the figure on the right the second layer is too thin for refractions through the second layer ever to be first arrivals. There would be no refraction at all from a low velocity layer; it would be directly detectable only if it generated measurable reflections. Travel times from two layers Travel times from two layers, of similar thickness over a the upper thick, the lower thin, half space over a half space !! ª ! 6 ¡¡ ! 6 ª ! ! !! t¡ !! t ª ! ! !! ¡ !! ! ª ! !! !!¡ ! ª ! ¡ ª ¡ @I@ ª @ ¡ J]Jª ¡ @ ª @ J ¡ ª J ¡ refractions from the second ª refractions from the ¡ ª hidden second layer ¡ layer (not seen if V2 < V1) ª ¡ ª -¡ -ª x x GEOPHYSICS (08/430/0012) INTERPRETATION OF REFRACTION PROFILES (2) Dipping layers These alter the apparent refractor velocity. The increasing delay with distance to the receiver when shooting down dip lowers the apparent down–dip refractor velocity. Similarly the decreasing delays shooting up dip increases the apparent up–dip velocity. For example, in the simple single layer case illustrated below, a dip of 1 in 8 (7:1®) makes the velocity estimated from the slope of the refraction times recorded down dip 7.26 km/s whereas that from the up–dip times is 9.06 km/s. In order to avoid velocity errors, refraction profiles should be shot in both directions, either as a split–spread or preferably as a reversed profile. S R1 R2 R3 Shooting down dip, A ³ ³³ ª the receiver delay A ³ ª AU 6 km/s ³7 ³ hhhh ³ ³7 ª increases with distance, A hhh ³ ³ hhhh ³³7 hh³hh ³ i.e. Vd < 8km/s. hh³h ³ 8 km/s hhhh ³hhhh Similarly Vu > 8km/s. GEOPHYSICS (08/430/0012) INTERPRETATION OF REFRACTION PROFILES (3) Use of reduced travel times It is often convenient to plot refraction travel times or display recordings using reduced travel times relative to a convenient reference velocity Vr. That is, results or records are displayed using the reduced time t (x=Vr), where x is source–to–receiver distance, instead of the actual time t. This reduces the size of the plot and makes it− easier to assess, for example, how well the travel times fit those computed from a model. The figure below illustrates the reduced travel time plot from a reversed profile shot over the model in the previous figure. The reference velocity Vr is 8 km/s. 6reduced time Solid lines: shooting down dip t (x=8) − from a source at x = 0 (( Dashed lines: shooting up dip Vu (( (( (( (( HH Vd ((( H (((( from a source at x = 320 km H (¨((( HH((((¨ H¨H¨ ¨¨ HH ¨ HH Note that the distance origin 6 km/s¨¨ HH 6 km/s ¨ HH for the up-dip times is x = 320 km ¨ H ¨¨ H ¨ HH - and that distance increases to the distance x 320 left. GEOPHYSICS (08/430/0012) REDUCED TRAVEL TIMES FOR A LAYER OVER A HALF SPACE The figure below shows the reduced travel times for the model of uniform layer over a half space. The model is the same as the one used earlier to illustrate the P-wave travel-time curves from a layer over a half space. The reduction velocity applied to the travel times is 8 km/s. It is important to realise that the slopes are no longer the reciprocals of the velocities but the velocities can still be found from the slopes and the reduction velocity. Can you see that it is easier to read ti accurately from this plot than the travel time plot. As an exercise, try calculating the depth of the Moho from t0 and ti using the formulae in "Seismic Travel Time Curves" from Lecture 4. Reduced P−wave travel times for a layer over a half space 25 20 15 t =10.0 s 0 slope=(1/6.0)−(1/8.0) critical distance 10 reduced travel−time (s) slope=0.0 5 t =6.61 direct P i reflected P crossover distance refracted P 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 distance (km) GEOPHYSICS (08/430/0012) CRUSTAL REFRACTION STUDIES (1) The Mohoroviciˇ c´ discontinuity Crustal refraction surveys show a distinct jump in velocity between crust and mantle. The boundary between them is named after its discoverer, A.Mohoroviˇci´c,who found it from investigating the Croatian earthquake of 8 October 1909.